Pick for need

[Mr. WEO]

Form WSJ.

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703956904576287280585329292.html

 

Essentially, if you need a certain position and the "top" guy is picked before you, don't pick the BPA. Pick the next guy rated at the position you need--he's likely to turn out as good or better than the "top" guy.

[scribo]

Some NFL teams have already said they plan to deal with this unique situation by drafting for need. According to a pair of economists, this is a good call.

 

Seriously? Football is much more than numbers.

[eball]

Interesting premise, but an overly simplistic analysis that doesn't factor the many variables that go into how "successful" a player becomes.

 

Unless the BPA is at a position of great strength on your roster, I don't think you can go wrong drafting that way.

[KRC]

I talked to a former NFL GM (will remain nameless) this afternoon. We discussed this very topic. His philosophy was that you always draft the BPA. His mentor (who will also remain nameless) had the same philosophy. The mentor violated that policy once. They had the first pick in the draft. They traded down to third to take a specific player based on need. They missed out on two Hall of Famers to select from one of five guys they had on their board that won't even sniff the HOF. That was the last time they violated their philosophy. The other GMs I have talked to have the same philosophy: draft BPA, not for need.

[K-9]

Playmaking football player is ALWAYS a position of need. You can't go wrong taking BPA, especially high in the draft.

 

GO BILLS!!!